Hollinger Corp. 
pH8.5 



LB 2387 
.S6 
Copy 1 



■ [ Whole Number 164J 

U. S. BUREAU OF EDUCATION. 
BULLETIN No. 1, 1890 



HOxNORARY DEGREES 



AS CONFERRED IN AMERICAN COLLEGES 



BY 



CHARLES FORSTER SMITH, A. M., Ph. D. 

PROFESSOR OF GREEK IN VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY 



[A PAPER READ BEFORK THE NATIONAL EDUCATIONAL ASSOCIATION 

AT Nashville, Tenn., July, 1889.] 



WASHINGTON 

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 

1890 









9- 



Qc 



HONORARY DEGREES, AS CONFERRED IN AMERICAN 

COLLEGES. 



Twenty-two years ago President D. C. Gilman called attention in the 
Nation (August 1, 1867) to some of the evils connected with the whole- 
sale bestowal of honorary doctorates in law and theology, asserting 
that " the mode in which honorary degrees are conferred in this coun- 
try is a sham and a shame." " It is so easy to get a degree," he charges, 
'' so many men of slight acquisitions have obtained degrees, that it is 
now the way to apply for these honors ; and if the secret sessions of 
college corporations were made public there* would be an astounding 
revelation of intimations and open requests and indorsements. Mem- 
bers of the faculties of colleges are constantly applied to to lend their 
influence to secure a doctorate for this person or that. By designed 
coincidences letters are sometimes received from distant points and 
from very different writers, calling attention to the peculiar merits of 
this or that candidate, and recommending him to favorable considera- 
tion." 

Ex-President Woolsey, also, in an article on " Academic Degrees," 
published in the Century, July, 1884, says: "If there are excrescences 
in the system, such as seem to be hurtful to the advance of real study, 
every educated man ought to desire that they should disappear. Such 
we hold to be honorary degrees, especially doctorates in law and in 
theology ; and we believe them to be so little in accord with solid learn- 
ing that we could wish them to be suppressed, or, if that is impossible, 
checked and regulated." " The desire to obtain the honor is a desire 
which no man should indulge," says he further, " and yet the uncer- 
tainty and unreasonableness of the rules of selection provoke such a 
desire, especially in persons who have no good claims by which it can 
be justified." 

My own experience confirms for the South the truth of the charges 
made by these distinguished college men against the American mode 
of conferring honorary degrees. Before the first commencement after 
I became a member of the faculty of a college in South Carolina a re- 

3 



4 HONOKARY DEGREES. 

quest was received from certain gentlemen of a distant State asking that 

the degree of D. D. be conferred on Reverend , of that State. In 

addition ^to the high qualifications claimed for the reverend gentleman, 
it was stated that he had written a book, and it was thought that the 
degree would aid him in getting a publisher and help the sale of the 
book. Not a member of the faculty knew the candidate or any of his 
friends, and they promptly declined to recommend the bestowal of the 
degree. Another request that I remember was signed by two or three 
very well-known clergymen asking that a doctorate in theology be 
granted a preacher from a distant State, who was practically unknown 
to every member of the faculty, the only ground for the request, so far 
as known, being the fact that the nominee had been elected to some 
important church office. I was told that such requests had been not 
infrequent in the history of the institution. But suppose the college 
had been weak enough to yield, what would have been the effect? The 
uninitiated would of course have taken the fact that the degree came 
from a distant college as proof of the extensive reputation of the new 
doctor. 

A young preacher of promise, considerably under thirty years of age, 
told me sometime ago that, being one day at Dr. B.'s, that gentleman said 

to him, " I am writing to College, to ask that the degree of D. D. 

be conferred on Mr. A.;" and added, " If you would like the degree, I'll 
offer your name, too.'? The young man declined ; but Mr. A. got the de- 
gree. I happen to know that Mr. A.'s name was sent at the same time to 
another college, which declined to grant him the honor, and thus deprived 
him of the great glory of being doubly dubbed. I believe that the 
above is not an uncommon way of securing honorary degrees, especially 
that of D. D. 

The ablest preachers generally get the degree, but so many others 
receive the same honor that its value is greatly impaired. President 
Woolsey's remark that " They carry with them no evidence of learning, 
but only a certain indefinite superiority above others in the same 
sacred calling," is eminently true. One of the ablest -men whom Ten- 
nessee has produced used to say : " Some men are doctored for their 
learning, some for general ability; but I was doctored on the demand 
of the people." I venture to say that seldom does a college take the 
trouble to ascertain what qualifications in the way of erudition or lit- 
erary ability the candidate may have. Prominence, general reputation, 
preaching ability, success as an evangelist, determine the bestowal so 
far as the recipient is concerned ; various motives of policy often influ- 
ence the college. A striking example in proof is at hand. One of the 
strongest literary institutions in the South has lately conferred D. D. 
on a man who, if he had continued his college course, would at the time 
he received his doctorate have, just finished his Junior year in Yander- 
bilt University. The causa honoris in this case was a successful pas- 
torate in the college town. 



HONORAEY DEGREES. 5 

It not uncommonly happens that the preachers, the newspapers, the 
people, doctor a man before the colleges are called in. A city could 
easily be mentioned where a preacher of any prominence is seldom in- 
troduced to an audience, or mentioned in the papers, except as "doctor,'^ 
and this without any regard for the facts in the case. It was observed at 
the General Conference of the Methodist Church, held in Nashville in 
1882, that on some occasions the presiding bishop recognized every 

preacher \yho rose to speak as "Doctor , from ." And at 

the meeting of the same body in Richmond, 188G, it is said the com- 
mittee on public worship, announcing the appointments for the various 
pulpits the following Sunday, read every appointee as ''doctor," until 
the matter became so ridiculous that the Conference burst into laughter. 
It is not to be supposed that anybody was in donbt as to anybody's title. 
It simply is, or is getting to be, the custom. 

The evil we complain of, like so many others in educational matters, 
has come from the over-multiplication of small colleges ; and the ab- 
surdity to which honorary degree giving has been carried in some of 
the weaker back-woods or " one-horse" colleges is almost beyond belief. 
The story that went the rounds of the papers, a year or two back, 
about a Texas university whose faculty consisted of a father and two 
sons, the latter of whom conferred the degree of LL.D. on the old gen- 
tleman, receiving in return each a doctorate of philosophy from the 
grateful sire, created not a little amusement, and was doul^tless consid- 
ered only a huge joke. 

But if the Texas story was considered too funny to be true, what 
will be thought of this which comes from Arkansas and is vouched for by 
a preacher : " Springs " had got on a boom, like most other South- 
ern towns and springs, and the public-spirited citizens determined that 
they needed, not, as the General Court of Massachusetts in 1647, 
a school, but in conformity with the era of booms, a college. They 
were persuaded to this action by a sewing-machine agent, who pro- 
posed to be president of the institution. One load of lumber was 
brought and thrown down upon the lot selected for the college, and on 
this the board of trustees took their seats and held their first session. 
The only business transacted was the election of the sewing-machine 
agent to the degree of D. D., after which they adjourned — to meet no 
more, for the man with the needle left with his degree, and the college 
was abandoned. 

There are competent witnesses still living who could testify in the 
case of the, man who in consideration of a donation of $10,000 to a cer- 
tain college, now happily defunct, was to receive a doctorate in theol- 
ogy. The college iierformed its part, but the donation was not made. 
If that gentleman had only known of the institution which is said to 
have conferred D. D. on the generous donor of a Webster's Unabridged 
Dictionary, he might have gone tlowu to the grave with the coveted 
title, and a better name for honesty in keeping his contracts. 



6 HONORARY DEGREES. 

In Tennessee, two at least, within my knowledge, of the so-called 
*' female colleges " have conferred honorary doctorates of law or divin- 
ity. One of these cases happened on this wise: The "female college" 
was about to die of inanition, and the president, calling the board of 
trustees together for the last time, got them to confer the degree of 
LL. D. upon himself and two others, one a popular preacher. 

A very good remark about honorary doctorates of this character is 
credited to the Rev. Sam Jones. Meeting one day two D. D.'s of recent 
brand, he said : " So, brethren, you are D. D.'s now *? Well, that thing 
is coming to me some of these days. I feel it in my bones. Not that I 
am going up to it; but when I see such men as you getting it, I know it 
is coming down, and will get to me after a while." 

Most colleges in the South and West, if not in the East, receive 
doubtless many curious and even amusing applications for the condi- 
tions of examination for doctor degrees. The most ambitious appli- 
cant that ever came under my personal observation was the author of the 
following letter, which the secretary of a leading south-western college 
allowed me to copy three years ago: 

*' Dear Sir : I wish to know what will be required of me to obtain the degree D. 

C. L. of University. I took of College, in 1880, A. B. ; 1881, A. M. ; in 

1884, Doctor of Philology. I have been admitted to the Supreme Court of . 

and have practiced law in almost two years. I have read everything pre- 
scribed in the law course of Albany, Ann Arbor, Vanderbilt, Yale, Harvard, Missouri 
University, anSi Has*ings Law College, for LL. B., and outside. I am exceedingly 
anxious to obtain D. C. L. As I have three degrees from Alma Mater, I should 
like the other to come across the Rockies. Pardon my ambition. Related mater- 
nally to the well-known Patrick Henry and paternally to J. C. Calhoun, I am doubly 
fired. Could I take your requirements without actual attendance? I will stand an 

examination forwarded by you to any member of College, or to any gentleman 

in . If actual attendance is required, could I be favored with a tutorship in 

languages, rhetoric, literature, elocution, or history, whilst taking the course ? I 
should hate to give up my law practice and go east, unless I could recompense with 
a tutorship, partially. Young men in the West need to stick to their territory. We 
will discuss that after hearing from you on the course. Let me hear from you im- 
mediately." 

In order to ascertain as nearly as possible what are the exact facts 
with regard to the bestowal of honorary degrees in the United States, 
I have made a laborious and careful study of the reports of the Com- 
missioner of Education for the fourteen years (1872-1885) for which we 
have information on the subject of honorary degrees. The following is 
the result :* 

* For convenience, I class all doctorates of law and letters under LL.D., and all 
doctorates of theology under D.D. Prof. John Williams White suggested, in his speech 
before the Scientific Association, August, 1881, that the favor into which S.T.D. had 
recently been growing in this country indicates, perhaps, " an attempt on the part of 
the clergymen to escape the odium attaching to the D. D. " 



HONORARY DEGREES. 



Tear. 


D. D. 


LL.D. 


Ph.D. 


Totals. 


1872 


138 
169 
191 
125 
137 
148 
157 
148 
132 
164 
188 
196 
195 
185 


90 

107 

71 

67 

69 

.58 

78 

106 

65 

92 

102 

91 

100 

101 


7 
17 
15 
19 
26 
19 
31 
33 
29 
49 
30 
36 
25 
22 


235 


1873 : 


293 


1874 


277 


187 J '. 


211 


1870 


232 


1877 


225 


1878 


266 


1879 


287 


1880 


226 


1881 


305 


1882 ... . . . ... ..» . 


320 




323 


1884 


320 




308 








2,273 


1,191 


358 


3, 822* 







* There may be, here and there, a slight error in the count, but it has been made with great care,, 
and may be depended on as substantially correct. 

It will be observed that, though there is some fluctuation^ the num- 
ber of honorary degrees conferred, especially doctorates of divinity 
and philosophy, is on the whole growing. An important question in the- 
matter of increase is this : Does the number of colleges conferring hon- 
orary doctorates increase in proportion to the number of degrees be- 
stowed ? This is answered by the table here given. 





Colleges re- 
porting to Com- 
missioner 
of Education. 


Number confer- 
ring honorary 
doctorates. 


Number con- 
ferring D. D. 


Number con- 
ferring LL. D. 


Number con- 
ferring Ph. D. 


1872 


298 
327 
374 
258 
289 
260 
273 
281 
• 287 
306 
336 
308 
347 
283 


83 
105 
103 

80 
101 
100 

96 
104 

88 
112 
124 
117 
139 
117 


67 
82 
93 
65 
72 
83 
79 
83 
71 
92 

103 
97 

108 
94 


51 
57 
45 
39 
51 
43 
47 
56 
44 
56 
54 
61 
64 
67 


7 


1873 


13 


1874 

1875 


10 
12 


1876 


20 


1R77 


14 


1878 


21 


1879 


17 


1880 


18 


1881 


29 


1882 


17 


1883 


26 


1884 


19 


1885 


19 




• 



It will thus be seen that the number of colleges conferring honorary 
degrees a little more than keeps pace with the number of colleges re. 
ported each year. The whole number of separate colleges that con- 
ferred honorary doctorates between 1872 and 1885 was 250, distributed 
over thirty-six States, two Territories, and the District of Columbia. 
Ohio heads the list, by right, as having more colleges and universities 
than any other State, with twenty -four; followed by Pennsylvania witb 
twenty-three, Illinois with eighteen, Tennessee and New York with 
seventeen each, Iowa with twelve, Indiana eleven, the remainder from 
eight to one. 

In the six New England States there were conferred from 1872 to 1885,. 
D. D., 264, LL. D., 272j in the four Middle States, D. D., 570, LL. D., 262 j 



8 . HONORARY DEGREES. 

in thirteen Southern States (including Missouri and West Virginia), 
D. D., 656, LL. D., 343; in twelve Western States and two Territories, 
B. D,, 757, LL. D., 278; in the District of Coluinbia, D. D., 12, LL. D., 3!. 
It will be observed that in New England the two degrees are conferred 
in nearly equal numbers, while in the Middle and Southern States 
about twice as many D. D.'s are bestowed as LL. D.'s, and in the West- 
ern States the proportion is nearly three to one. 

With regard to Ph. D. as an honorary degree. President Woolsey has 
this to say in his excellent article: "The degree of Pb. D., which in 
-Germany is what M. A. has been in England and the United States, 
has been for a few years used among us as a degree conferred, on ex- 
amination, upon students in science. There certainly can be no objec- 
tion to this novelty, if the examination is severe and thorough. But 
some colleges, chiefly, if not entirely, seated in the Western States, went 
beyond this and gave the degree to some who, without an examination 
for it, had gained some distinction in physical science. It was according 
to logic and analogy so to do ; but a convention of scientific men, more 
than a year since, protested against the extension of the field of honors, 
and their protest has been received, we judge, with no dissatisfaction 
by the country." 

If I understand President Woolsey aright, his statement is a little 
misleading. The resolution adopted by the American Philological 
Association, at the meeting held in Cleveland, Ohio, July, 1881, and con- 
curred in by the American Association for the Advancement of Science 
at its next meeting, held in Cincinnati, August, 1881, was as follows : 

Whereas many college^ in the United States tave, in recent years, conferred the 
degree of doctor of philosophy, not by examination, but honoris causa : be it 

Resolved, That this association deprecates the removal of this degree from the class 
to which it belongs (namely, B. D., LL. B., M. D., and Ph. D., degrees conferred after 
examination), and its transfer to the class of honorary degrees. • 

My impression Is that in most cases where Ph. D. has been conferred 
it has been given as a sort of lower LL. D., and just as LL. D. would 
be given, with or without regard to attainments in physical science. In 
«very instance that has come within my own knowledge this has been 
the case. 

In one other point, too, President Woolsey is wrong. Many persons, 
doubtless, have supposed, as he did, that the colleges thus conferring 
Ph. D. as an honorary degree were " chiefly if not entirely seated in 
the Western States." But the report of the Commissioner of Educa- 
tion tells a different tale. From 1872 to 1885, inclusive, 358 honorary 
doctorates of philosophy were conferred in the United States, and 156 
of these were given in New York, Pennsylvania, Delaware, and New 
Jersey, while only 107 were given in ten Western States. New Eng- 
land has a better record in this respect than the three Middle States. 
But 44 honorary doctorates of philosophy were conferred in New Eng- 
land colleges, Dartmouth leading, with 20; Williams, University of 



HONORARY DEGREES. 



9 



Vermont, and Amherst, 5 each ; Bowdoin and Lewis College, 3 each ; 
Colby, Bates, and Maine Agricultural aud Mechanical College, 1 each. 
In twelve Southern States 44 such doctorates were conferred, and 6 in 
the District of Columbia. All will readily agree with President Woolsey 
in his objection to the custom which has come into vogue of making the 
degree honorary ; it is simj)ly that he is wrong as to geographical distri- 
bution. 

It is a pity that the custom has not been confined to small colleges, for 
then it might easily be rendered ridiculous, aud so checked; but when 
such a protest as that of the philological and scientific associations 
is unheeded by institutions like Princeton, Amherst, Michigan Uni- 
versity, Lafayette, Dartmouth, Hamilton, Madison, Union, Dickinson, 
Western Reserve, University of Wisconsin, University of North Car- 
olina, De Pauw, University of the City of New York, all of which 
conferred Ph. D. as an honorary degree the year after the protest or 
later, it can not be hoped that the weaker institutions. West, South, 
or East, will seriously heed the protests of scholars. 

Perhaps nothing shows more clearly how serious is the evil connected 
with the bestowal of honorary degrees, complained of by Presidents 
Woolsey and Gilman, than the growth of the custom of conferring 
Ph. D. as an honorary doctorate. The value of the degree, which in 
Germany is the reward purely of scholarship as proved by examination 
and other tests, was speedily imi)aired when colleges big and little all 
over the land began to confer it as a sort of inferior LL. D. A table 
will easily show the spread of this as an honorary degree. 





Number col- 
leges confer- 
ring Ph. D. 


Number hon- 
orary Ph. D. 's 
conferred. 


1872 


7 
13 
10 
12 
20 
14 
21 
17 
18 
29 
17 
26 
19 
19 


7 


1873.: 


17 


1874 


15 


1875 


19 


1876 . .. 


26 


1877. . 


19 


1878 


31 


1879 


33 


1880 


29 


1881 


49 


1882 


30 


1883 


36 


1884 


25 


1885 


22 







It will be seen that the protest of the philological and scientific asso- 
ciations had seemingly some temporary effect, inasmuch as there was a 
drop down from 29 colleges conferring 49 honorary doctorates of phil- 
osophy in 188], to 17 colleges with 30 such degrees in 1882; but the 
very next year the number of colleges so bestowing the degree had 
again risen to 25 and the degrees to 36. 

The worst feature of the matter, however, is not the increase in the 
number of honorary doctorates of philosophy, but in the advance in the 



10 HONORARY DEGREES. 

number of colleges, especially small colleges — Western, Middle, and 
Southern — so conferring the degree. For we find that whereas only 
seven colleges from 5 States so conferred the degree in 1872, up to 1885 
one hundred and eleven colleges from 32 States had so bestowed it. 
These included all the Middle States, 4 New England, 10 Western, 13 
Southern, and the District of Columbia. In other words, the custom 
has spread over the whole country. A hasty glance at the list of 111 
colleges that have conferred honorary Ph. D.'s will show that while a 
number of leading colleges — some of which were mentioned above — 
have set thebad example, it has been followed chiefly by the smaller 
and weaker colleges of the Middle, Western, and Southern States.* 

With regard to A. M., the custom was formerly well-nigh universal 
in American colleges of conferring this second degree three years after 
graduation on those of their graduates who were engaged in a literary 
calling, or had prosecuted further studies in any branch. The Univer- 
sity of Virginia introduced the English custom of conferring A. M. on 
examination, just as A. B. Of late years most of the best colleges 
have adopted this plan; but very many, perhaps most, colleges that 
confer honorary degrees, though they may have ceased to give A. M. 
three years after graduation to any of their graduates who apply, still 
confer it as an honorary degree on their own graduates or others. In 
1880 — I looked no farther back — 119 honorary A. M.'s were conferred ; 
in 1881, 180 ; in 1882, 138 ; in 1883, 149 ; in 1884, 178 ; in 1885, 140. In 
these six years, too, I find at least 25 colleges not reported as confer- 
ring honorary doctorates which conferred A. M., thus swelling the num- 
ber to 275. Moreover, as the term " in course" leaves it undetermined 
whether the degree is conferred on examination or three years after 
graduation on application, it is reasonable to infer that the number of 
actual honorary A. M.'s is very much greater still. 

One fact of promise for the future is that most of the recently founded, 
well-endowed and equipped colleges and universities do not confer hon- 
orary degrees. The University of Virginia in this, as in so many other 
respects, set a good example to other institutions, and has never since 
the opening in 1825 deijarted from the rule to confer no honorary de- 
grees. She has had a goodly and eminently respectable, if not large, 
following in Johns Hopkins, Boston University, University of Cali- 
fornia, Vanderbilt,t Purdue, Tulane, University of Texas, and in three 
of the four best female colleges, namely. Smith, Wellesley, and Bryn 
Mawr. 

* As to individual colleges, the highest number of honorary doctoi'ates of philosophy 
during the fourteen years belongs to Lafayette, namely, 24 ; next comes Princeton, 
21 ; then Dartmouth, 20 ; the University of Wooster, 20 ; University of the City of 
New York, 15 ; Hamilton, 16 ; Washington and Jefferson, 13 ; Union, 11 ; Madison 
University and Pennsylvania College, 7 each ; University of Michigan, 7 ; Western 
Reserve College, 6 ; the others, from 5 to 1. 

t Reserves the right to confer honorary degrees, but has exercised it only once, 
and then gave ample reasons for making an exception to its announced rule of con- 
duct in favor of an eminent scholar. . 



HONORARY DEGREES. 11 

Honorary degrees properly bestowed and ia reasonable number could 
not be detrimental. In the best educational systems of Europe they 
still obtain. But it is clear that the reductio ad absurdum is about 
accomplished in the United States. At least 365 universities and col- 
leges have the right to confer honorary degrees, and within fourteen 
years 275 separate institutions are found to have exercised the right. 
And this makes no allowance for the colleges that confer degrees but 
do not report. These would swell the number considerably. In 1872 
the Commissioner of Education received reports from 298 colleges, and 
of these 83 conferred 235 honorary doctorates. Thirteen years later 
(1884) he received reports from 347 colleges, but this time 139 colleges 
conferred 320 honorary doctorates. Can even so great a country as the 
United States produce learned 'men, great men, or even strong men, 
sufficient to keep the mills going? But are all these institutions really 
entitled — except by their charters — to confer honorary degrees ? Pres- 
ident Woolsey thinks, " Where, in a place of learning a certain branch 
of study is not taught, there ought to be no degrees given in it." Ap- 
plying this test, we find that only 48 colleges and universities were re- 
ported in 1884 as having theological departments, but a single glance 
at many of the names in the list shows that if the doctorates might, 
by being limited to these, be lessened in number, they would not be im- 
proved in quality. 

Several honorary degrees have recently been conferred by the great 
colleges on women — and surely no one can find fault with this if the 
degrees are confined to such women — and this will help for a time to 
briug up the general average of quality among the doctors. But even 
this new supply can give only temporary relief. With 250 colleges 
giving honorary doctorates, the market is sure to be overstocked, and 
values to depreciate. 

Then, too, if the boards of trustees of two or three so-called "female 
colleges " have conferred honorary doctorates, what is to hinder the 
j)ractice from becoming general ? What if the legion of these so-called 
"female colleges" all over the South and South -West had taken to 
conferring honorary degrees, and had bestowed these honors after the 
manner in which most of them now grant their diplomas *? Add the 
fact that at least two military academies and six agricultural colleges 
and industrial universities (which, President Woolsey supposes, "would 
not think of conferring the degree with which we have to do") have 
conferred honorary doctorates. What is to hinder others from doing 
likewise ? Is it not, after all, a mercy that matters are not worse ? 

As to the remedy : I know no better cure for the evils herein detailed 
than the suggestion of President Gil man. He proposes: "First, the 
older and firmer colleges might refuse to give honorary degrees under 
any circumstances. The smaller and younger colleges would be likely 
to follow the example. This would be the simplest and easiest mode 
of remedying the abuse. Or, secondly, doctorates in law or theology 



12 



HONORARY DEGREES. 



might be given on examination, the candidate o 021 345 094 3 ( 
candidates for the baccalanreate, openly and honorably, with a thesis 
or treatise which should exhibit his attainments. This is the usage c 
some of the foreign universities. Or, thirdly, a college might declar 
its purpose to advance its own graduates to honorary distinctions o 
certain recognized principles of promotion — the publication of som 
scholarly work, the accomplishment of some literary task, or the attair 
ment of some high position. In every case the reasons for bestowiuj 
the degree should be openly avowed. If a man is made doctor of laws 
the public have a right to know whether it means he has fought a battle 
or is on the right side in politics, or is a donor to the extent of fiv< 
thousand dollars and upwards. " 



h 



A 



,^S.£»aiil9 



021 345 094 3 



''m. 



.^■■< 



^^,=v.v\v 



